Alan Caruba's blog is a daily look at events, personalities, and issues from an independent point of view. Copyright, Alan Caruba, 2015. With attribution, posts may be shared. A permission request is welcome. Email acaruba@aol.com.

Friday, August 30, 2013

The Syrian Scenario

By Alan
Caruba

Arabs are
particularly fond of dates with historical or religious significance. Recall
the Yom Kippur War in 1973, the fourth Arab-Israeli war led by a coalition of
Egypt and Syria. Like earlier wars, it ended in defeat for the Arabs.

It happens
that sundown on Wednesday, September 4, marks the beginning of Rosh Hashanah,
the Jewish New Year. It will be followed ten days later by Yom Kippur. The
temptation to attack Israel must have many in the Middle East salivating.

Arabs have
not shown any reluctance to blow each other up during their own holy month of Ramadan,
nor from attacking people in mosques or even those attending funerals, so the
coming week would be one of watchfulness even if events in Syria were not
spiraling toward an expansion of its civil war that would include an attack on
Israel.

Behind all
of this is Iran. They are the puppet-masters, controlling Hezbollah in Lebanon
and directing the civil war in their client-state, Syria, as the Assad regime
seeks to hold onto power. Syria is supported by the Russians as well. The
result so far has been 100,000 dead civilians and combatants, the latest of
whom were gassed to death.

After
Secretary of State John Kerry’s melodramatic speech on Friday, August 30, it is
clear that it was intended to prepare Americans for an attack on Syria by U.S.
forces, presumably missiles and excluding the use of troops. The navy would
take the lead, but what Americans are likely unaware of is the fact that
Russian-made surface-to-ship missiles could retaliate and, if U.S. aircraft are
also involved, surface-to-air missiles would come into play.

Following
Secretary Kerry’s speech, Politico.com reported that “President
Barack Obama called Syria's chemical weapons attack ‘a challenge to the world’
and said he is considering a "limited, narrow act" against the
county's regime. We're not considering any open-ended commitment," Obama
said. "We're not considering any boots on the ground approach."

"I have not made any decisions," Obama said. "We have consulted
with allies. We have consulted with Congress."

“Consulting”
with Congress is not the same as getting authorization—a vote—as the
Constitution requires, to launch an attack against Syria. It is, after all, an
act of war. Even the War
Powers Act, as squishy as it is, assumes a response to an attack on the
homeland.

Meanwhile,
the Syrians have had plenty of time to move much of their arsenal and armaments
to relative safety.

The
Iranians want to know what the U.S. response will be. Perhaps they recall the
relative silence of the U.S. when Saddam Hussein was using gas against their
troops during the eight-year war he waged against them. Perhaps they recall the
muted response when Hussein gassed Kurds in the northwestern region of Iraq.

President
Obama has left himself with few options because he cannot go to the United
Nations Security Council where any effort to condemn Syria or give its
blessings to an attack would be vetoed by Russia. After members of Congress saw
the British parliament vote against participation in an attack, they are not
likely to want to cast votes authorizing one. There’s no coalition of nations
supporting Obama though France has said it would be willing. Even the War
Powers Act, as squishy as it is, assumes a response to an attack on the
homeland.

This observer
thinks Obama will launch an attack on Syria and it might well come on Sunday. I
also think that a Syrian attack on Israel in retaliation will get little U.S.
support because nothing Obama has said (his word is dirt) or done demonstrates
any fondness for Israel.

A
President who can turn his back on a longtime ally like Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak
is not likely to feel any concern about Bibi Netanyahu’s little nation. Israel,
however, is the only ally in the region with the capability of attacking Iran
and damaging its nuclear capabilities.

The U.S.
missile attack will be symbolic. If it lasts more than a day, maybe two, I
would be surprised. Only the killing of Assad would change the game on the
ground and he’s likely to be in a secret bunker somewhere.

If a
Syrian missile should hit one of our ships, the U.S. will be “all in” whether
we want to be or not. Our “allies” in Syria would be a variety of terrorist
groups such as al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Conducting
a war in such a manner is idiotic, but Obama does not want to go to the
up-coming G-20 meeting in Europe looking like a wimp who will not back up his
earlier warnings to Assad and will do nothing given the use of poison gas. The “message”
he is sending will be for Iran, not Syria.

Iran has
been at war with America since 1979 when American diplomats were seized and
held hostage. We are the “great Satan” and Israel is the “little Satan.”As Iran moves closer to acquiring nuclear
capabilities, its leaders feel emboldened.

About Me

I am and have been for a long time a writer by profession. I have several books to my credit and my daily column, "Warning Signs", is disseminated on many Internet news and opinion websites, as well as blogs. In addition, I am a longtime book reviewer and have a blog offering a monthly report on new fiction and non-fiction.